World War III: Moscow warns Czechs and Poles on U.S. shield [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

World War III: Moscow warns Czechs and Poles on U.S. shield

El Legenda
02-20-2007, 10:48 PM
:wavey: paranoid Russians :lol:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/19/news/shield.php

MOSCOW: Poland and the Czech Republic risk being the targets of Russian missiles if they agree to provide sites for a proposed U.S. missile defense system, a Russian general warned Monday.

Russia has been increasingly bellicose in its response to the U.S. proposal to build the missile defense system in Eastern Europe. General Nikolai Solovtsov, head of Russia's missile forces, said the system would upset strategic stability. It would be the first such site in Europe.

"If the governments of Poland and the Czech Republic take such a step," he said, "the Strategic Missile Forces will be capable of targeting these facilities if a relevant decision is made."

President Vladimir Putin has said he does not trust U.S. claims that the system would be to guard the American East Coast and Europe from missiles launched from "rogue nations" in the Middle East.

But on Monday, the Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, said his country and Poland were in favor of the U.S. missile defense proposal.


"I think it is in our joint interest to negotiate this initiative and to build in our area the missile defense," Topolanek said after talks in Warsaw with the Polish prime minister, Jaroslaw Kaczynski.

The bases in Poland and the Czech Republic would be designed to intercept missiles being developed by Iran, U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Henry Obering, director of the Missile Defense Agency, said last month. Two other bases in Alaska and California would protect the United States from threats from North Korea, Obering said.

Kaczynski brushed aside Russia's fears, saying "the missile defense is not directed against any normal state."

"Any statement suggesting that the missile defense would change the alignment of forces in Europe is a misunderstanding," he said. "This truth is being conveyed to our partners in the west and the east."

A State Department spokesman, Edgar Vasquez, said Monday the United States has worked closely with the Czech and Polish governments to develop the missile defense system and that it was in no way directed at Russia.

"We have offered to cooperate with Russia on missile defense because we believe we face a common threat emanating from the Middle East as well as other areas," Vasquez said.

Solovtsov said he was concerned that the United States, which plans to deploy 10 interceptors in Poland, could increase those numbers in the future.

The general also said it would take Russia less than six years to build upgraded versions of medium range missiles if Moscow decided to pull out of a 1987 agreement with the U.S. that banned their deployment.

"It is not difficult to restore their production," Solovtsov said at a news conference. "The missiles were dismantled, but the production technology has remained."

Russian military officials have said Moscow's decision to pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty would depend on whether the United States went ahead with the missile defense plan. The key arms control agreement was negotiated between the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan.

At a European security conference this month, Putin said the treaty was outdated, and that many nations had since developed the medium-range missiles eliminated by Russia and the United States.

Putin has warned that Russia could respond to the deployment of U.S. missile defense in Europe by building new, more efficient weapons. He had previously boasted that Russia was developing new missiles that would be impossible to intercept.

Solovtsov said Russia would continue gradually replacing Soviet-built intercontinental ballistic missiles with new Topol-M missiles and would fully rearm around 2016 while maintaining levels under a 2002 arms control treaty signed by Putin and President George W. Bush. That treaty obliges both sides to cut their strategic nuclear weapons by about two-thirds by 2012. "It's possible to deploy such weapons shortly if the situation requires that," Solovtsov said.

Ivan Safranchuk, director of the Moscow office of the U.S- based Center for Defense Information, said that Russia was using its threat to pull out of the treaty in a bid to force Washington to backtrack on its missile defense plans.

"The calculation is that the Europeans, who stand to lose the most from this, will put pressure on the United States," he said in a telephone interview

mtw
02-21-2007, 09:22 AM
This system is redandent in Poland. If our Polish politicians have mind and think about our future, then they reject this stupid proposal.
Besides UK troops will withdraw from Iraq soon. I think, that Polish politicians should finish this unecessary coalition with US, as soon, as possible. It gives nothing good to our state.

zicofirol
02-21-2007, 02:46 PM
lol, how long ago did the cold war end?, russia just wants to see themselves as a world power again, then again I dont see what is the benefit of having a missle system in Europe, to protect europeans? , if they want to protect the east coast there are better locations where it could go..

HybridTheory
02-21-2007, 03:02 PM
paranoid Americans :lol:

mtw
02-21-2007, 05:25 PM
:wavey: paranoid Russians :lol:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/19/news/shield.php

They are not paranoid. I don't support Russians policy, but I think, that they are right in this case. Majority of Polish nation does not support of stupid plans of some members of our government. We want to have peace in our region, no unnecessary conflicts with neighbours and no unfamiliar, hostile, american bases and troops on our terytory. When our president have no source of worry, then he can think, how to create workplaces for Polish people in Poland, not in Ireland or England or Germany.
There is the huge poverty in some regions of the world and if Bush has too much money, then he can give financial, not military support for poor people ( for instance in Africa or South America of course: purpose: humanity aid, not fight agains internal enemy )
By the way. This is the end of cold war ( about 20 years ago ). What for is this organisation called as NATO? To take care of US interests? Would not be better to create own European troops within EU?

sondraj06
02-21-2007, 07:15 PM
They are not paranoid. I don't support Russians policy, but I think, that they are right in this case. Majority of Polish nation does not support of stupid plans of some members of our government. We want to have peace in our region, no unnecessary conflicts with neighbours and no unfamiliar, hostile, american bases and troops on our terytory. When our president have no source of worry, then he can think, how to create workplaces for Polish people in Poland, not in Ireland or England or Germany.
There is the huge poverty in some regions of the world and if Bush has too much money, then he can give financial, not military support for poor people ( for instance in Africa or South America of course: purpose: humanity aid, not fight agains internal enemy )
By the way. This is the end of cold war ( about 20 years ago ). What for is this organisation called as NATO? To take care of US interests? Would not be better to create own European troops within EU?

Do your homework before making statements like that, america gives the more money in foreign aid than any other country. Or did that escape your radar

Castafiore
02-21-2007, 08:15 PM
Where do you get that info (source?) and what sort of foreign aid are you talking about?

Source: OECD
Development aid (2004)

1. Official Development Assistance (ODA), in million USD:
EU-15: 42.919
US: 18.999

2. ODA in % of GNI
EU-15: 0,36%
US: 0,16%
Italy: 0,15%
Belgium: 0,41%
The Netherlands: 0,74%
Sweden: 0,77%
Norway: 0,87%
UK: 0,36%
Germany: 0,28%
Japan: 0,19%
...

3. ODA to LDC (Least Developped Countries, as determined by UN), % of GNI (2003)
EU-15: 0,13%
US: 0,04%
Italy: 0,08%
Belgium: 0,35%
The Netherlands: 0,26%
Sweden: 0,27%
Norway: 0,36%
UK: 0,12%
Germany: 0,10%
Japan: 0,04%
...

http://ocde.p4.siteinternet.com/publications/doifiles/012005061T030.xls


It looks to me as if Putin longs for another cold war judging by the latest series of speeches he's given.

sondraj06
02-21-2007, 08:31 PM
Carol Adelman, a specialist in foreign aid and development at the Hudson Institute July 27, 2005
By Elizabeth Farabee
Washington File Staff Writer


Washington -- International giving by American citizens, the private sector and nongovernmental groups is an important measure of U.S. foreign assistance and reveals that Americans are generous when it comes to helping others, says Carol Adelman, a specialist in foreign aid and development with the Hudson Institute in Washington.
In terms of official government foreign assistance, “the U.S. gives the most in absolute amounts, more than twice what the second ranked donor, Japan, gives,” said Adelman during a global Internet chat July 27.



this was form 2005 i'll try to find more up to date sources


http://usinfo.state.gov/eur/Archive/2005/Jul/27-997226.html

Castafiore
02-21-2007, 08:33 PM
In absolute amounts, perhaps, but that doesn't say all that much. If you want to compare countries, you need to look at the relative figures. See above where you can see the absolute figures and the relative figures.
But even then, the EU-15 spends more than the US on development aid in absolute amounts.

Personally, I think that all these % are rather low compared to the GNI of those countries.

sondraj06
02-21-2007, 08:44 PM
USAID in the context of U.S. foreign aid

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/22/Marcos_Payloader.jpg/220px-Marcos_Payloader.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Marcos_Payloader.jpg) http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Marcos_Payloader.jpg)
President (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_Philippines) Marcos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_E._Marcos) tries out a payloader, which was donated to the Philippines through the USAID


At the Earth Summit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Summit) in Rio de Janeiro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_de_Janeiro) in 1992, the world's governments adopted a program for action under the auspices of the United Nations–Agenda 21, which included an Official Development Assistance (ODA) aid target of 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) for rich nations, roughly 22 members of the OECD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OECD), known as the Development Assistance Committee (DAC).
US levels for foreign aid fall short of this goal (the US currently ranks last among the world's wealthiest countries at about 0.1 percent of GNP.) However, in absolute amounts, the United States is currently the world's top donor of economic aid, providing $16.254 billion in 2003 according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
In 2001, the United States gave $10.9 billion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1000000000_%28number%29), Japan $9.7 billion, Germany (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany) $4.9 billion, the United Kingdom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom) $4.7 billion, and France (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France) $4.3 billion. As a percentage of GNP, however, the top donors were Denmark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark), Norway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway), the Netherlands (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands), Luxembourg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxembourg), and Sweden (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden). The Netherlands (pop. 16.3 million) gave $3.2 billion in 2001 — almost a third of what America contributed.
The 2003 budget of President Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) proposed $11.4 billion in foreign aid with an additional $4.3 billion for peacekeeping operations and to finance, train, and educate foreign armed forces. By fiscal year 2006, the President's budget requested $9.1 billion for development and humanitarian assistance administered by USAID; the Agency will uniquely program and manage approximately $5.0 billion and manage an additional $4.1 billion in coordination with the Department of State.
The fiscal year 2006 USAID budget request totals $4.22 billion in the following accounts: Child Survival and Health: $1.252 billion, Development Assistance: $1.103 billion, International Disaster and Famine Assistance: $655.5 million, Transition Initiatives: $325 million, P.L. 480 Food for Peace: $885 million. In addition, USAID will manage the following programs with the Department of State: Support for East European Democracies: $382 million, FREEDOM Support Act: $482 million, and Economic Support Funds: $3.036 billion.
USAID states that "U.S. foreign assistance has always had the twofold purpose of furthering America's foreign policy interests in expanding democracy and free markets while improving the lives of the citizens of the developing world." However, some critics say that the US government gives aid to reward political and military partners than to advance genuine social or humanitarian causes abroad.
USAID, in partnership with Higher Education for Development (HED)[2] (http://www.hedprogram.org/) ], promotes higher education's engagement in social and economic development through institutional and human capacity building in developing countries. Since 1997, more than 250 higher education partnerships in over 60 nations have received USAID funding to strengthen economic capacity, support agricultural productivity, improve health, develop access to clean water, and much more.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USAID#USAID_in_the_context_of_U.S._foreign_aid

So yeah america could do more as far as total income to aid, but wealthy people don't stay wealthy by giving it all away. Any way what they don't report on is how much everday working poor americans give to foreign aid. those numbers might suprise people

zicofirol
02-21-2007, 10:42 PM
In absolute amounts, perhaps, but that doesn't say all that much. If you want to compare countries, you need to look at the relative figures. See above where you can see the absolute figures and the relative figures.
But even then, the EU-15 spends more than the US on development aid in absolute amounts.

Personally, I think that all these % are rather low compared to the GNI of those countries.

I would imagine its worse if your country spends more, giving away tax money, if the politicians want to donate they can do it themselves, if people want to do it they can donate themselves, tax money is "suppose" to be given back in the form of "social services", not given away to some dictator somewhere in teh world... why is it that the countries that have received the most amount of aid (billions) in the last 20 years are still the poorest? even after billions poured into those countries?

Former Central African Republic leader Jean-Bedel Bokassa: "We ask the French for money. We get it, and then we waste it." haha...

"For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!" (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,363663,00.html)
here is an excerpt
The Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati, 35, says that aid to Africa does more harm than good. The avid proponent of globalization spoke with SPIEGEL about the disastrous effects of Western development policy in Africa, corrupt rulers, and the tendency to overstate the AIDS problem.
SPIEGEL:

Mr. Shikwati, the G8 summit at Gleneagles is about to beef up the development aid for Africa...

Shikwati: ... for God's sake, please just stop.

SPIEGEL: Stop? The industrialized nations of the West want to eliminate hunger and poverty.

Shikwati: Such intentions have been damaging our continent for the past 40 years. If the industrial nations really want to help the Africans, they should finally terminate this awful aid. The countries that have collected the most development aid are also the ones that are in the worst shape. Despite the billions that have poured in to Africa, the continent remains poor.

SPIEGEL: Do you have an explanation for this paradox?

Shikwati: Huge bureaucracies are financed (with the aid money), corruption and complacency are promoted, Africans are taught to be beggars and not to be independent. In addition, development aid weakens the local markets everywhere and dampens the spirit of entrepreneurship that we so desperately need. As absurd as it may sound: Development aid is one of the reasons for Africa's problems. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn't even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit. Which is why they maintain that the world would stop turning without this development aid.

SPIEGEL: Even in a country like Kenya, people are starving to death each year. Someone has got to help them.

Shikwati: But it has to be the Kenyans themselves who help these people. When there's a drought in a region of Kenya, our corrupt politicians reflexively cry out for more help. This call then reaches the United Nations World Food Program -- which is a massive agency of apparatchiks who are in the absurd situation of, on the one hand, being dedicated to the fight against hunger while, on the other hand, being faced with unemployment were hunger actually eliminated. It's only natural that they willingly accept the plea for more help. And it's not uncommon that they demand a little more money than the respective African government originally requested. They then forward that request to their headquarters, and before long, several thousands tons of corn are shipped to Africa ...

SPIEGEL: ... corn that predominantly comes from highly-subsidized European and American farmers ...

Shikwati: ... and at some point, this corn ends up in the harbor of Mombasa. A portion of the corn often goes directly into the hands of unsrupulous politicians who then pass it on to their own tribe to boost their next election campaign. Another portion of the shipment ends up on the black market where the corn is dumped at extremely low prices. Local farmers may as well put down their hoes right away; no one can compete with the UN's World Food Program. And because the farmers go under in the face of this pressure, Kenya would have no reserves to draw on if there actually were a famine next year. It's a simple but fatal cycle...

Choking on Aid Money in Africa (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,363604,00.html)

sondraj06
02-21-2007, 10:53 PM
I would imagine its worse if your country spends more, giving away tax money, if the politicians want to donate they can do it themselves, if people want to do it they can donate themselves, tax money is "suppose" to be given back in the form of "social services", not given away to some dictator somewhere in teh world... why is it that the countries that have received the most amount of aid (billions) in the last 20 years are still the poorest? even after billions poured into those countries?

haha...

"For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!" (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,363663,00.html)
here is an excerpt


Choking on Aid Money in Africa (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,363604,00.html)

The heavens have opened up and awwww(singing) no I've said that before, Aid doesn't do anything but because people choose to see everything in dollars signs they think everything can be fixed by dollar signs. they have done interviews on top on reports about africans telling people look all this money is doing nothing to fix the problem, the problem is not lack of money it is lack of means to make money and a decent life for oneself and until people see and realize that, poor countries are going to remain poor, no matter how much money you throw at it, I wish people would get that.

SushiMinimal
02-22-2007, 02:58 AM
It's just another silly idea of the Christian fundamentalist group behind bush. They think they're blessed by the universe and can do whatever they want in the world in god's name.lol. new orleans, halliburton, global warming. yeah sure. the judgement day is close. yes indeed...lol. jesus is rolling over in his grave. damn.

come on Al Gore

mtw
02-22-2007, 02:05 PM
Carol Adelman, a specialist in foreign aid and development at the Hudson Institute July 27, 2005
By Elizabeth Farabee
Washington File Staff Writer


Washington -- International giving by American citizens, the private sector and nongovernmental groups is an important measure of U.S. foreign assistance and reveals that Americans are generous when it comes to helping others, says Carol Adelman, a specialist in foreign aid and development with the Hudson Institute in Washington.
In terms of official government foreign assistance, “the U.S. gives the most in absolute amounts, more than twice what the second ranked donor, Japan, gives,” said Adelman during a global Internet chat July 27.



this was form 2005 i'll try to find more up to date sources


http://usinfo.state.gov/eur/Archive/2005/Jul/27-997226.html

And it is called propaganda of your country. We give more, that Japan, which gives nothing. You are very specific country.

mtw
02-22-2007, 02:16 PM
It's just another silly idea of the Christian fundamentalist group behind bush. They think they're blessed by the universe and can do whatever they want in the world in god's name.lol. new orleans, halliburton, global warming. yeah sure. the judgement day is close. yes indeed...lol. jesus is rolling over in his grave. damn.

come on Al Gore

This idea has nothing to do with Christianity. I am catholic too. And I have nothing against muslims or other Christians ( Russians are Orthodox ) or atheists. Besides I am opponent of this ill, hewn idea. And not only I. There are many, thinking people, which know, that this is dangerous for my country and maybe even for the peace in my region. And saying about confidence. I don't know, what american religion looks like, but in my confidence one of basic rules is: ,,Not to kill''. This is sin, which can not be absolved. And many politicians in my country are allegedly Catholics too.

sondraj06
02-22-2007, 03:04 PM
And it is called propaganda of your country. We give more, that Japan, which gives nothing. You are very specific country.

No pumpkin, when you're opinion is framed from opinion as opposed to fact that's called propoganda and it seems poland has produced a whole country full of it. Go check on it, get the facts and then call it propoganda, that's how that works

nkhera1
02-23-2007, 12:14 AM
They are not paranoid. I don't support Russians policy, but I think, that they are right in this case. Majority of Polish nation does not support of stupid plans of some members of our government. We want to have peace in our region, no unnecessary conflicts with neighbours and no unfamiliar, hostile, american bases and troops on our terytory. When our president have no source of worry, then he can think, how to create workplaces for Polish people in Poland, not in Ireland or England or Germany.
There is the huge poverty in some regions of the world and if Bush has too much money, then he can give financial, not military support for poor people ( for instance in Africa or South America of course: purpose: humanity aid, not fight agains internal enemy )By the way. This is the end of cold war ( about 20 years ago ). What for is this organisation called as NATO? To take care of US interests? Would not be better to create own European troops within EU?

Why shouldn't America protect its own interests? I don't see anyone else really looking out for us.

mtw
02-23-2007, 07:48 AM
No pumpkin, when you're opinion is framed from opinion as opposed to fact that's called propoganda and it seems poland has produced a whole country full of it. Go check on it, get the facts and then call it propoganda, that's how that works
Dude, your opinions are typical american, in accordance with propaganda of your country and not true..

mtw
02-23-2007, 07:53 AM
Why shouldn't America protect its own interests? I don't see anyone else really looking out for us.



Yes, of course. You can protect your interests on your own territory ( I can remind you of it. This is area between Mexico and Canada in North America ).

sondraj06
02-23-2007, 04:24 PM
Dude, your opinions are typical american, in accordance with propaganda of your country and not true..

You call what I say propoganda but I had the facts pumpkin, for you too call it propoganda you'd have to go find something that disputes that, which you haven't done yet.

mtw
02-23-2007, 06:40 PM
You call what I say propoganda but I had the facts pumpkin, for you too call it propoganda you'd have to go find something that disputes that, which you haven't done yet.

Girl, you must stop living in fiction and begin to live in reality. What are your facts? These facts are given by propaganda of your country. And this is no reliable source of information. Besides some people in this forum gave facts and you torpedo it, because you are convinced, that it is not true and only your american sources give true. Does not independent thinking exist in your coutry at all? You believe in all, what your press or any unknown people think out. I have read on ABC, that students in your country are not in the top of the ranks. Inversely.
What source of facts should I quote? For instance www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2238223,00.html
www.serendipity.li/cia/cia_milan_kidnap.htm
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6316369.stm
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6382675.stm

sondraj06
02-23-2007, 08:50 PM
^ Because you have a problem with our gov't you have a tendency to confuse our gov't with everyday american life. Look I'm sorry you hate the way we run our foreign affairs but that'syour right. it's our right to do as we see fit, you don't have to like it. You've never defended anything I've said with facts, you might want to go back and read through this thread. There is nothing all that shocking about the two articles you posted. and once again were do you get your info oh televsion, nice. all you know about america is what you see on t.v. I hope you don't base your life around what other precieve america to be, by a plane ticket one day.

mtw
02-24-2007, 10:46 AM
^ Because you have a problem with our gov't you have a tendency to confuse our gov't with everyday american life. Look I'm sorry you hate the way we run our foreign affairs but that'syour right. it's our right to do as we see fit, you don't have to like it. You've never defended anything I've said with facts, you might want to go back and read through this thread. There is nothing all that shocking about the two articles you posted. and once again were do you get your info oh televsion, nice. all you know about america is what you see on t.v. I hope you don't base your life around what other precieve america to be, by a plane ticket one day.

You know. I have no problem with your government and none of other governments in this world, because I am legal citizen. However your government has problems with the world. I don't know, maybe it is the blame of these concrete government. But, that's, what they do, it is terrible. They irritated Muslims and now they try to irritate Russians. What for? Because of stupidity? And the only of their alliance is president of Poland, because majority of people in Poland are in opposition. I must mention, that we are not significant state in Europe. Maybe some of our leaders wanted to shine, but they did not do that. What's more, they expose Poland on economic losses, because of conflict with Russia and the citizens of country to loss of life, because of an attack of Muslims extremists. It can happen. Some people in Poland are afraid of getting on the train or bus. It is not normal and not fair. This conflict did not concern us.
You are right. I have nothing against American society, because these poor people are daily nourished with propaganda. I feel pity for this. But this is not my blame. And their way of life leaves much. But, because of democracy, they can do, what they want. And they should permit to other people live, as they want too, because every has own still of life.
I know many other Internet pages. Every person can find it in google. For instance USA + internal debt, CIA + Argentina 1976-1978 and many others.
I don't suppose, that so many people are in oppositions to wonderful US and think out all these things. It is true.
Besides US is not my favourite coutry. Personally I think, that there are many attractiver states in these world in Europe, and in South America. I don't intend to go or live in US.

Midnight Express
02-25-2007, 08:23 PM
What?
World War III?
:haha:

THAT'S JUST AWESOME FUNNY!

sondraj06
02-25-2007, 08:59 PM
You know. I have no problem with your government and none of other governments in this world, because I am legal citizen. However your government has problems with the world. I don't know, maybe it is the blame of these concrete government. But, that's, what they do, it is terrible. They irritated Muslims and now they try to irritate Russians. What for? Because of stupidity? And the only of their alliance is president of Poland, because majority of people in Poland are in opposition. I must mention, that we are not significant state in Europe. Maybe some of our leaders wanted to shine, but they did not do that. What's more, they expose Poland on economic losses, because of conflict with Russia and the citizens of country to loss of life, because of an attack of Muslims extremists. It can happen. Some people in Poland are afraid of getting on the train or bus. It is not normal and not fair. This conflict did not concern us.
You are right. I have nothing against American society, because these poor people are daily nourished with propaganda. I feel pity for this. But this is not my blame. And their way of life leaves much. But, because of democracy, they can do, what they want. And they should permit to other people live, as they want too, because every has own still of life.
I know many other Internet pages. Every person can find it in google. For instance USA + internal debt, CIA + Argentina 1976-1978 and many others.
I don't suppose, that so many people are in oppositions to wonderful US and think out all these things. It is true.
Besides US is not my favourite coutry. Personally I think, that there are many attractiver states in these world in Europe, and in South America. I don't intend to go or live in US.

But the thing you would understand if you came to america, I don't know the size of poland, but america is big. people call us a salad bowl for a reason. there are many opinions about many different things in america. Maybe everyone in poland feels the same way about things but there are many different opinions here. For some reason you think propaganda is an issue here, but I have to tell you for propaganda to be a probably the majority of the people would have to believe the same thing. If you came here you would understand the diversity that is america. Maybe everyone feels the same about the american gov't in poland but not everyone feels the same about even the american gov't in america.

nkhera1
02-26-2007, 01:28 AM
Yes, of course. You can protect your interests on your own territory ( I can remind you of it. This is area between Mexico and Canada in North America ).

Read what you said in your post.

mtw
02-26-2007, 01:50 PM
Read what you said in your post.

What is wrong? Do you not even know, where your state localised is? I know, that you americans don't know, where new york is, but I didn't know, that you don't know, where US is situated. I've heard ( it was a probe with students, the part of them did not know, where New York was localised ). This society is ridicule.
Is US not localised in continent, which is called North America? Is that in your opinion Asia or South America or maybe it is localised on the Mond?

mtw
02-26-2007, 01:58 PM
For some reason you think propaganda is an issue here, but I have to tell you for propaganda to be a probably the majority of the people would have to believe the same thing. If you came here you would understand the diversity that is america. Maybe everyone feels the same about the american gov't in poland but not everyone feels the same about even the american gov't in america.

I'm sorry, but people in Poland and in Europe have better education, than people in US. We can think independently and we have independent press too. BBC and Reuters are two big independent press sources in Europe. They don't lie.
Besides Europe is more diverse and richer in culture, than US. Besides we have more languages and we are many more tolerant, than your country ( Majority of countries. Maybe my president not very tolerant, but this is separate subject).

sondraj06
02-26-2007, 04:08 PM
I'm sorry, but people in Poland and in Europe have better education, than people in US. We can think independently and we have independent press too. BBC and Reuters are two big independent press sources in Europe. They don't lie.
Besides Europe is more diverse and richer in culture, than US. Besides we have more languages and we are many more tolerant, than your country ( Majority of countries. Maybe my president not very tolerant, but this is separate subject).

Right Go tell the puerto rican family down the street, Then walk two houses down and say the same thing to the african family. How diverse Is poland really now. Lets not talk about diversity. You don't know anything about what it is to live in america you never have, stop pretending as if you do. there is that propaganda thing again. I'm sure there have been a thousand reports on and american life. But you can not get an accurate picture of america through t.v, because the fact of the matter is, everyone's america story is different. When you went to school in poland, how many black kids did you have class with, how many Puerto Ricans, of Africans, or Guatemalans how about Chinese or Filipinos or Mexicans. I didn't get that experience until I was in high school, because up until that point I had only been to school in my neighborhood which was all black. When I finally did, I realize not everyone was like this or that. Like I said before you try so hard to generalize america which is fine we do have our own culture, but if you truly knew anything about us, you'd know that the layers are much deeper than your perception. And seriously is any one place more diverse than america. I don't think so. And that fact that you say that your independently press doesn't lie just tells me that you believe everything that you hear, as opposed to doing your own research and reading between the lines. Look I don't know if you know this but we get bbc news in america and guess what rueters too.So if you want the info its there. americans have access to it too.

zicofirol
02-26-2007, 05:57 PM
I'm sorry, but people in Poland and in Europe have better education, than people in US. We can think independently and we have independent press too. BBC and Reuters are two big independent press sources in Europe. They don't lie.
Besides Europe is more diverse and richer in culture, than US. Besides we have more languages and we are many more tolerant, than your country ( Majority of countries. Maybe my president not very tolerant, but this is separate subject).

the BBC is state owned... the only state owned channels in the US are cspan, where you can watch congress debate...

Europe thinks differently, lol, europeans think more alike than americans do, much more.

Europe is thousands of years older than the US, obviously it is much richer in culture... no shit about the languages... the US is one country, made up of mostly European descendants, so, if anything blame youre great european ancestors. And the US is the melting pot of the world, much more diverse than any European country, by far...

Lol, Europe is more tolerant, that takes the cake right there, hahaha, statement of the month...

sondraj06
02-26-2007, 06:02 PM
the BBC is state owned... the only state owned channels in the US are cspan, where you can watch congress debate...

Europe thinks differently, lol, europeans think more alike than americans do, much more.

Europe is thousands of years older than the US, obviously it is much richer in culture... no shit about the languages... the US is one country, made up of mostly European descendants, so, if anything blame youre great european ancestors. And the US is the melting pot of the world, much more diverse than any European country, by far...

Lol, Europe is more tolerant, that takes the cake right there, hahaha, statement of the month...

Yeah I had to laugh at that one myself, I didn't want to say it but. America might have our issues with tolerance but it's because we are so tolerant about who comes in our country, european countries look like nazi camps compared to america when it comes to immigrations, Some times I think we are to laxed on the issue. But that another one of those issues that you can ask 10 people about and get 10 different answeres because everyone experience is different. But for the most part we are forced to live and deal with each other, and sometimes that's hard to do with so much diversity. but america has come this far and eventually we'll get it right even if it takes 1,000 years.

zicofirol
02-26-2007, 06:09 PM
When you went to school in poland, how many black kids did you have class with, how many Puerto Ricans, of Africans, or Guatemalans how about Chinese or Filipinos or Mexicans.
or jews, oh wait they killed them all, never mind... and those that where left, they made sure to kick them out to Israel...
or indians, pakistanis, iranians , russians, like I said in my previous post, the USA is the most ethnically diverse country in the world by far, they also accept most refugees than any other country... people fleeing their country either from whatever africa, bosnians, serbs fleeign the war, latin american's fleeing right and left wing dictatorships, arabs fleeing their oppressive countries etc. end up in America, at least many of them do...

Castafiore
02-26-2007, 09:21 PM
Damn...this is one weird thread. Bunch of stupid clichés thrown together trying to prove that either the US or Europe is so much better and apparently, the best way to go about that is to just point and laugh at the other side and you're making a joke of sometimes complicated issues by using exaggerated words like nazi camps (come on, now...that's a stupid exaggeration) or when mtw says something like "we can think independently" as if the entire US is just a collection of brainwashed robots.

Sorry guys, but this thread is just plain dumb and pointless on both sides.

sondraj06
02-26-2007, 09:31 PM
Damn...this is one weird thread. Bunch of stupid clichés thrown together trying to prove that either the US or Europe is so much better and apparently, the best way to go about that is to just point and laugh at the other side and you're making a joke of sometimes complicated issues by using exaggerated words like nazi camps (come on, now...that's a stupid exaggeration) or when mtw says something like "we can think independently" as if the entire US is just a collection of brainwashed robots.

Sorry guys, but this thread is just plain dumb and pointless on both sides.

as opposed to this post which contributes a lot.

Castafiore
02-26-2007, 09:35 PM
as opposed to this post which contributes a lot.
Sondraj, do you honestly believe that you can convince somebody by using a term like nazi camps when talking about immigration laws in Europe? This is an honest question. What does it accomplish?

The immigration issue in Europe is complicated and varies from country to country. You can't lump it together and put a "it's so tough, it might as well be a nazi camp" stamp on it. Who are you going to convince with that argument and why argue at all with mtw who seems to have a rather black and white view on the US?

But how about using some facts?

Going back to the immigration issue.
Source: OECD
2004 - Inflow of foreign populations (thousands):
EU-25 + Norway and Switzerland: 2.814,5
US (permanent): 946,1
US (temporary inflow): 1.299,3

So, I would say that Europe has more than its share of immigrants here.

sondraj06
02-27-2007, 01:56 AM
How about reading the post, I really could care less about mtw's views on american gov't I think I said that, people are allowed to have whatever view of our politics they want. But everyday american life is quiet different, and that's what I was talking about. And i think people tend to forget that europe is a continent, america is not. so when we talk about europes collective amount of immigrants that come into that continent it's a bit different for the u.s since we are just a country.

Castafiore
02-27-2007, 07:35 AM
"I really could care less about mtw's views on american gov't "
Why do you keep talking to mtw, then?

So, you would love people to realize that the policy of the US government does not necessarily match the viewpoint of every US citizen, that American everyday life is rich and varied and watching American movies and American tv shows doesn't really give you a complete picture of what it means exactly.
Right?

I agree with you that mtw has a very black and white view of the US. You may disagree with the current US governement's policies on various issues but it's silly to portray an entire continent as standing as one man behind their president for example.
However, instead of just making that point, you do the same as mtw does: exaggerate.
What does it accomplish in a conversation when you say that the immigration laws in various European countries is so tight that it could as well be a "nazi camp". What does this exaggeration do?
Can't you see that you're trying to deal with an exaggerated view on the US by exaggerating about a couple of European countries?
I don't mean to antagonize you with this but I'm just wondering why you would exaggerate to counter an exaggerated viewpoint and I repeat my question: what does it accomplish in a conversation to use terms as "nazi camps". That's just used for the shock effect.

And i think people tend to forget that europe is a continent, america is not. so when we talk about europes collective amount of immigrants that come into that continent it's a bit different for the u.s since we are just a country.
I live in Europe so I'm well aware of the fact that it's a continent but consisting of many countries. In fact, I even brought that up in my own post.

Okay, let's have some more facts and figures then.
Sources: CIA The World Factbook + OECD

1. Population (2006)
US: 298.444.215
Belgium: 10.751.067
France: 62.751.136
Germany: 82.422.299
Spain: 40.397.842
UK: 60.609.153
Italy: 58.166.509

2.A. Immigration inflow (2004, in thousands)
US: 946,1 permanent, 1.299,3 temporary
Belgium: 72,4
France: 140,1
Germany: 602,2
Spain: 645,8
UK: 494,1
Italy: 319.3

2.B. Immigration inflow (% of population)
US: 0,32% permanent, 0,44% temporary
Belgium: 0,70%
France: 0,22%
Germany: 0,73
Spain: 1,60%
UK: 0,82%
Italy: 0,55%

3.A. Asylum seekers inflow (2006)
US: 48.770
Belgium: 15.960
France: 50.050
Germany: 28.910
Spain: 5.260
UK: 30.460
Italy: 9.500

3.B. Asylum seekers inflow (% of population)
US: 0,016%
Belgium: 0,154%
France: 0,080%
Germany: 0,035%
Spain: 0,013%
UK: 0,050%
Italy: 0,016%


These are just the official statistics which may of course vary from the real situation but it does give you an idea of the sort of inflow some European countries and the US have.
I'm not stating these figures just to prove that certain European countries have more/are more/are better/are worse/whatever. I'm not that patriotic and I'm not the flag waving type. I'm happy to live in the country I do live in but it's far from a perfect place although I'm not planing to leave it but I can well imagine leading a happy life in many other countries like the US for example.
But these figures could give you an idea of the immigration/asylum seekers scale coming from various countries, various cultures, speaking a mixture of languages because you were mentioning " And seriously is any one place more diverse than america. I don't think so". I'm not that sure what you know about Europe when you write that.

Naide
02-27-2007, 07:58 AM
Yeah I had to laugh at that one myself, I didn't want to say it but. America might have our issues with tolerance but it's because we are so tolerant about who comes in our country, european countries look like nazi camps compared to america when it comes to immigrations, Some times I think we are to laxed on the issue.


Oh My God

mtw
02-27-2007, 12:12 PM
Right Go tell the puerto rican family down the street, Then walk two houses down and say the same thing to the african family. How diverse Is poland really now. Lets not talk about diversity. You don't know anything about what it is to live in america you never have, stop pretending as if you do. there is that propaganda thing again. I'm sure there have been a thousand reports on and american life. But you can not get an accurate picture of america through t.v, because the fact of the matter is, everyone's america story is different. When you went to school in poland, how many black kids did you have class with, how many Puerto Ricans, of Africans, or Guatemalans how about Chinese or Filipinos or Mexicans. I didn't get that experience until I was in high school, because up until that point I had only been to school in my neighborhood which was all black. When I finally did, I realize not everyone was like this or that. Like I said before you try so hard to generalize america which is fine we do have our own culture, but if you truly knew anything about us, you'd know that the layers are much deeper than your perception. And seriously is any one place more diverse than america. I don't think so. And that fact that you say that your independently press doesn't lie just tells me that you believe everything that you hear, as opposed to doing your own research and reading between the lines. Look I don't know if you know this but we get bbc news in america and guess what rueters too.So if you want the info its there. americans have access to it too.

I think, that rich nations should help for these poor people from South America and Africa, who emigrate and enable them the normal life in their own countries. They should live, study and work there not in US. And where do they live in US? On the East Coast? I think, that they are citizens of second class very oft. And they work very hard. They practise second class jobs, which are not taken up by Americans. Besides I have read and I have seen in TV, that your beloved government imposed the construction of the huge enclosure to prevent emigration of Mexican citizens. Probably they want to build enclosure from Canadian side too. Do they Canadians want to emigrate in US too? I don't understand it.
Besides the subject is: antimissile bases. Poland nation want no US bases on our territory. We don' t want and never accept the unfriendly army on our territory too, if somebody would have such redundant idea.

sondraj06
02-27-2007, 02:03 PM
I think, that rich nations should help for these poor people from South America and Africa, who emigrate and enable them the normal life in their own countries. They should live, study and work there not in US. And where do they live in US? On the East Coast? I think, that they are citizens of second class very oft. And they work very hard. They practise second class jobs, which are not taken up by Americans. Besides I have read and I have seen in TV, that your beloved government imposed the construction of the huge enclosure to prevent emigration of Mexican citizens. Probably they want to build enclosure from Canadian side too. Do they Canadians want to emigrate in US too? I don't understand it.
Besides the subject is: antimissile bases. Poland nation want no US bases on our territory. We don' t want and never accept the unfriendly army on our territory too, if somebody would have such redundant idea.

That's right you don't understand, and you never will. America like I said is too laxed when it comes to our policy on immigration. Next time go watch a movie on how the mexican immigration problem got to where it is right now. To the point where people are talking about building walls to keep them in their own countries. Immigrations is a process that is suppose to be legal, when you immigrate illegally by sneeking into this country not only is it unfair for those immigrates who did it the right way but it is very dangerous, the process of coming from mexico here trying to do it a lot of times at night. Some people die, that's not good. And as far as immigrates being second class citizens that bull, I agree that illegal immigrants a lot of the time take jobs that legal workers wounld't a lot of the time they have no choice, but one huge problem a lot of americans have with immigration is the fact that they see people come from other countries over here and get jobs and find wealth that people who were born and live here don't get. Is that true or not, ew it depends on who you ask. I do find the immigrates live quit comfortably in this country, it depends on what you make of it. That's the beauty of america.

sondraj06
02-27-2007, 02:25 PM
Here are some facts about the issue some immigrants have living in the U.S

http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/back101.html From a U.S source
More than 1.2 million legal and illegal immigrants combined now settle in the United States each year.
The number of immigrants living in the United States has more than tripled since 1970, from 9.6 million to 28.4 million. As a percentage of the U.S. population, immigrants have more than doubled, from 4.7 percent in 1970 to 10.4 percent in 2000.
By historical standards, the number of immigrants living in the United States is unprecedented. Even at the peak of the great wave of early 20th century immigration, the number of immigrants living in the United States was less than half what it is today (13.5 million in 1910).The number of refugees accepted for resettlement plunged sharply following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, especially in the United States. But gradually, they have been going up again and in 2005 reached 80,800, including some 30,500 who were resettled with UNHCR assistance. In all, 83 UNHCR country offices were involved in resettlement departures during 2005.

Numbers at a glance
2005

Refugees

america 53,813

Australia 11,654

canada 10,400

sweden 1,264

finland 766

and onward


these are just the numbers for refugess

http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/basics/opendoc.htm?tbl=BASICS&id=3b028097c#Basic%20Facts


At the beginning of 2006, the number of people of concern to UNHCR was 20.8 million.
They included 8.4 million refugees (40%), 773,500 asylum seekers (4%), 1.6 million returned refugees and IDPs (7%), 6.6 million internally displaced people (32%), 2.4 million stateless people (11%) and 960,400 'others of concern' to UNHCR.
The figure of 20.8 million was an increase of 6 percent over the previous year's 19.5 million. The increase was attributable to two principal developments: the continuing rise in the number of internally displaced people helped by UNHCR and the availability of more data on stateless people.
The global refugee population, UNHCR's 'core constituency' dropped from 9.5 million to 8.4 million, principally because of the return of 752,000 Afghans from Pakistan and Iran. It was the lowest refugee total since 1980.
The number of people who went home – usually known as 'returnees' – reached 1.1 million in 2005, 400,000 fewer than in 2004. Some 715,000 of them were assisted by UNHCR.
136,000 new prima facie refugees were registered in 2005, the smallest number for 29 years. Major exoduses occurred from Togo [39,100], Sudan [34,500], the Democratic Republic of the Congo [15,600], Somalia [13,600] and the Central African Republic [11,500].
Asia hosted around two-fifths of all the people of concern to UNHCR, 8.6 million or 41%, followed by Africa 5.2 million [25%], Europe 3.7 million [18%], Latin America 2.5 million [12%], North America 716,800 [3%] and Oceania 82,500 [0.4%].
During 2005, a total of 668,400 people applied for asylum worldwide, more than half of them in Europe. The largest number of claims were submitted by nationals of Myanmar, Somalia and Serbia and Montenegro. Combined with applications still pending from previous years, the overall total awaiting decision at the start of 2006 was 773,500.
The top five refugee-hosting countries are Pakistan: 1,085,000 (UNHCR estimate); Iran: 716,000; Germany: 700,000; Tanzania: 549,000; and United States: 380,000 (UNHCR estimate).
All five experienced a decrease in the total number of refugees on their soil.

^^TOP (http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/basics/opendoc.htm?tbl=BASICS&id=3b028097c#TOP)

sondraj06
02-27-2007, 02:50 PM
Illegal Immigration Census 2000 results indicate that there between 8 and 11 million illegal aliens living in the United States in 2000. The Center for Immigration Studies has reported that Census Bureau stats show that 700,000 to 800,000 new illegal aliens were settling in the U.S. during the late 1990s and that around 1 million settled in the most recent year of record. Far more than that enter illegally each year, but there is a lot of back and forth. The 1 million represents illegals who truly settle in for at least a couple of years, and usually much, much longer.



America has a hugh problem with immigration laws.....



When I say Europe is like a nazi camp compared to america, I mean when it comes to our policies on immigration. They are too laxed and allow for too many people to break the rules. Take it as you will, if that some how offended you grow a back bone.






http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/illegalimm.html





(http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/illegalimm.html)



(http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/illegalimm.html)

Castafiore
02-27-2007, 05:44 PM
When I say Europe is like a nazi camp compared to america, I mean when it comes to our policies on immigration. They are too laxed and allow for too many people to break the rules. Take it as you will, if that some how offended you grow a back bone.
"nazi camp" is used for the shock effect in your comment (my guess anyway) but it still is a very poor comparison and and exaggeration. I have enough back bone, thank you very much, but if I find a certain comparison exaggerated, I'd like to point it out from time to time.

I notice that you're using the term "Europe" again when talking about immigration laws.
I've said this before and you used the same argument after that but only when it fits you, it seems - Europe is a continent with various countries. The immigration laws are complex and they vary from country to country. You can not lump together the entire continent like that just to compare the situation with the US.
The US is a huge country, so it's easy to impress people by using absolute figures but they don't say much when comparing a situation in various countries.
Your immigration figures are all good and fine but those are absolute figures. You need to look at the relative figures to asses the real impact of immigration on a country compared to other countries.
My little country has 10,7 million citizens so the impact of 50.000 immigrants for example is not exactly the same thing as 50.000 in a country with the population and the size of the US.

However, this is a rather pointless discussion to me so I'm going to leave this discussion here.

mtw
02-27-2007, 08:32 PM
That's right you don't understand, and you never will. America like I said is too laxed when it comes to our policy on immigration. Next time go watch a movie on how the mexican immigration problem got to where it is right now. To the point where people are talking about building walls to keep them in their own countries. Immigrations is a process that is suppose to be legal, when you immigrate illegally by sneeking into this country not only is it unfair for those immigrates who did it the right way but it is very dangerous, the process of coming from mexico here trying to do it a lot of times at night. Some people die, that's not good. And as far as immigrates being second class citizens that bull, I agree that illegal immigrants a lot of the time take jobs that legal workers wounld't a lot of the time they have no choice, but one huge problem a lot of americans have with immigration is the fact that they see people come from other countries over here and get jobs and find wealth that people who were born and live here don't get. Is that true or not, ew it depends on who you ask. I do find the immigrates live quit comfortably in this country, it depends on what you make of it. That's the beauty of america.

1. Have you ever been in a foreign country to work and live there?
What do you know about such kind of living? You understand really nothing.
These poor people leave their poor countries to improve their material standards. They make it, cause of desperation. Not because of love to US. And one thing to do is to help them in their own countries in such way, to improve standards of life, enable to study and work in their own countries.
And what kind of job have majority of refugees in US? They are unemployed or they have seasonal work, cleaners etc. They live very oft in districts for poor people ( emigrants ), where crime blossoms. Why don't they run away to Europe? Because Europe is very far. It is very hard to swim across the ocean. They have no money and they want to go to US, because they think, that this is some kind of heaven. But we know, that it is not.
2. This very interesting subject about emigration is not theme of this issue.
3. The theme of this issue is: World war III.
Majority of Polish nation want neither antimissile bases nor redundant american army on our territory. We never accept it. It should be national referendum in my coutry. Such important decisions must be consulted with Polish society. Taking part of our troops in war in Irak is unecessery to Poland too. This thing should be the subject of referendum too.

Peoples
02-27-2007, 08:41 PM
People arguing with "mtw"? :haha: Hilarious...when will people figure out mtw's tactic of just repeating one absurd argument, forever! Without any discussion ever taking place, simple really.

mtw
02-28-2007, 11:27 AM
People arguing with "mtw"? :haha: Hilarious...when will people figure out mtw's tactic of just repeating one absurd argument, forever! Without any discussion ever taking place, simple really.

And so fellow. What argument is absurd in your opinion? Are you so clever? It seems not.

TennisGrandSlam
02-28-2007, 12:27 PM
USA should merge with all NATO member states, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Kwaitt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Singapore, Argentina, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, maybe Taiwan :devil:

Jim Jones
02-28-2007, 02:01 PM
It's just another silly idea of the Christian fundamentalist group behind bush. They think they're blessed by the universe and can do whatever they want in the world in god's name.lol. new orleans, halliburton, global warming. yeah sure. the judgement day is close. yes indeed...lol. jesus is rolling over in his grave. damn.

come on Al Gore

what does global warming have to do with Christian fundemetalists or New Orleans as a matter of fact? The state government there was local and last time I checked, it was the dems who were in power there.

Jim Jones
02-28-2007, 02:04 PM
In absolute amounts, perhaps, but that doesn't say all that much. If you want to compare countries, you need to look at the relative figures. See above where you can see the absolute figures and the relative figures.
But even then, the EU-15 spends more than the US on development aid in absolute amounts.

Personally, I think that all these % are rather low compared to the GNI of those countries.

YOu want to compare the U.S. with EU which is not a nation? Ok fine but then in that case I would hope that EU figures are higher since EU has population of 400 million compared with 300 million for U.S. and has a larger area. So then it is natural for EU figures to be higher.

mtw
02-28-2007, 04:25 PM
USA should merge with all NATO member states, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Kwaitt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Singapore, Argentina, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, maybe Taiwan :devil:


Maybe Russia and China too?
I think, that NATO had sense, where times of Cold War were reigned. There are no threat, because of USSR, because it does not exist from 20 years. I suppose, that somebody will think, that NATO can be redundant in Europe. And participation in these wars, which are evoked by government of US can be dangerous for inhabitant of Europe. You remember: explosions in Madrit and in London. Why had innocent European people to die, because of any political capricies of US gov. And still something new. Now antimissile bases in my country. We are independent state and we are not the military training field of USA.

mtw
02-28-2007, 06:00 PM
This idea of antimissile bases in Poland is really sick and redundant.

thegreenkat
03-03-2007, 05:20 PM
oh, please! sondraj06 and mtw- you're comparing apples with pears (well, this is Czech expression, but I think that you understand) .. you can't compare American mentality with European one. You both are right in some points. And also wrong in others. I haven't lived in US, but I have friends there (close, family friends) and some of our teachers at my University and also at my former high school are American .. I can make a picture, besides the fact that I'm studying economics and "international affairs" .. .. please, don't get angry to each other ..

btw sondraj06, you've asked how many "different nationalities" mtw can meet at the street/school etc ... well, really, there are not as many as in US but THERE ARE .. we don't have so many black people (but at least some! I have friends who are Afro-American), we don't have puero ricans, mexicans here, but we have Vietnamies, Chinese, Italian, Russins, Ukrainians, gypsies (from many different countries) and some other not so numerous groups .. it just depend on where are you from .. of course mexicans are moving to US and not to Europe .. we have also many refugees, you're not the only country where people are running to ..

well, I can continue more and more but there's no reason for it. Many people don't like Americans and many people have aversion for Europeans .. I like both, both have charm, can be friendly .. the point is that as a country, you are represented by your politicians (every country is) and people tend to hate those so then they have distorted picture (pf, I hope it's the right expression) of whole nation ..

mtw
03-05-2007, 12:31 PM
NO system of antimissile defence in Poland.

Svetlana.
03-06-2007, 10:24 PM
^ Because you have a problem with our gov't you have a tendency to confuse our gov't with everyday american life. Look I'm sorry you hate the way we run our foreign affairs but that'syour right. it's our right to do as we see fit, you don't have to like it. You've never defended anything I've said with facts, you might want to go back and read through this thread. There is nothing all that shocking about the two articles you posted. and once again were do you get your info oh televsion, nice. all you know about america is what you see on t.v. I hope you don't base your life around what other precieve america to be, by a plane ticket one day.

You have to agree that people from Poland on this site know more than you think, and get their info from more sources than you can imagine. For instance, they know English and can read news and statistics from around the world ... and can you? I might be wrong, but very likely you don't know any other languages except English, plus watch only US television and maybe read the same newspapers everyday?

My point again is try to listen to what others are saying and don't assume that everything that Americans do around the World is good for that World. Americans are pursuing their interests everywhere they can. If they give donations to someone, they want to get a lot of dividends back.

Don't get me wrong Americans are wonderful people, but for some reason many of them think that only their opinion is absolute, and very often have "my way or highway" attitude. ;)

Cheers and Good luck to you!!!! :wavey:

Svetlana.
03-06-2007, 11:03 PM
NO system of antimissile defence in Poland.

I hope you are not the only one who agenst the antimissle defence in Poland ... and your opinion does matter... ;)

TennisGrandSlam
03-07-2007, 03:52 AM
Maybe Russia and China too?
I think, that NATO had sense, where times of Cold War were reigned. There are no threat, because of USSR, because it does not exist from 20 years. I suppose, that somebody will think, that NATO can be redundant in Europe. And participation in these wars, which are evoked by government of US can be dangerous for inhabitant of Europe. You remember: explosions in Madrit and in London. Why had innocent European people to die, because of any political capricies of US gov. And still something new. Now antimissile bases in my country. We are independent state and we are not the military training field of USA.


USA + all NATO member states + Japan + South Korea + Saudi Arabia + Kwaitt + Iraq + Afghanistan + Singapore + Argentina + Mexico + Australia + New Zealand + Taiwan = American Empire


The President of USA = American Emperor :devil: (Only Citizens in USA can vote for The President :rolleyes: )

zicofirol
03-07-2007, 05:54 AM
USA + all NATO member states + Japan + South Korea + Saudi Arabia + Kwaitt + Iraq + Afghanistan + Singapore + Argentina + Mexico + Australia + New Zealand + Taiwan = American Empire


The President of USA = American Emperor :devil: (Only Citizens in USA can vote for The President :rolleyes: )
:retard: :retard: :banghead: :smash:

taiwan? lol

mtw
03-07-2007, 01:49 PM
[QUOTE=TennisGrandSlam;4988901]USA + all NATO member states + Japan + South Korea + Saudi Arabia + Kwaitt + Iraq + Afghanistan + Singapore + Argentina + Mexico + Australia + New Zealand + Taiwan = American Empire


You know. It is insult, what you wrote here. Even Poland is not the part of not existing american empire. Maybe South Arabia and Kuwaitt. And our super Polish leaders hesitate now, if they should smartly withdrew from alliance with USA and begin to fight for chances in future elections ( they must begin to think logically. They will be unemployed after 2 years ). This government is the least popular in Poland. There were no government in Poland till now, which would have worst opinion. They must go towards people, not on the contrary - to keep their positions. If their are afraid of USA of an unknown for people reason, then they should make referendum for people in such cases for instance: elements of american antimissile defence in Poland, presence of Polish troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, building of highway in Rospuda valley.
And for supporters of US I have very nice information. Their leaders signed treaty abour free air space between Europe and US. It means, that it can be the end of Boeing. Era of Airbuss is coming.